Recount results from NH SoS for Hillsborough county

[rinsd]

http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountresults.htm

[LostinVA]

1. Damn, she's rigged the hand recount, too

[Zynx]

2. I guess she must just be all powerful.

[emilyg]

18. She made it snow in Georgia yesterday .

[rodeodance]

23. ha ha--good one!

[BootinUp]

27. more like sleet, but it was different :-)

[emilyg]

30. In Dekalb we had snow - briefly.

[annie1]

29. Good, then i DEFINITELY want her as pres. :D

[papau]

4. LOL - I wonder how Brad will report this :-)

[MethuenProgressive]

3. Richardson is picking up votes!

Go Bill! :thumbsup:

[dugggy]

5. The elctronic machines seem to have been extremely accurate

now what do we tin foil hatters do? damn damn damn!!!

[wyldwolf]

6. well, she's obviously paying the SoS. Isn't he/she a Hillary national campaign co-chair?

Or a DLC spy who has been in deep cover for some time now?

[rodeodance]

24. yup you got it.- you are so so so smart:

NOT

[HeraldSquare212]

7. Strange

I guess wards 5 and 7 haven't been finished.

[jasmine621]

8. Based on these recounts, I would say that the Clinton campaign would do well

to insist on recounts everywhere.

[ORDagnabbit]

9. you do realize its less than 20,000 votes counted and even on that page 2 areas havent been recounte

and its not about who wins.....

its about verify the process in which we trust hackable machines to count votes.

[rinsd]

14. And right now the machines look pretty accurate at least in this election.

Which makes election reform people looks silly because conspiracy nuts went apeshit.

Which means election reform can be ignored again.

Funny how that works.

[ORDagnabbit]

16. no it makes people like you seem like you dont believe every vote matters

hand count all the votes and then lets talk about it.

there is no reason why there should ever be any errors.

hand count the damn ballots and make it an open process so we can start to regain faith in our democratic system.

[rinsd]

20. Yes because hand counted ballots can't be tainted.

:sarcasm:

"there is no reason why there should ever be any errors."

What a ridiculous statement. Not that one should not strive towards eliminating as many possible errors as possible. But the above shows how far from reality you are.

[bunnies]

19. Pretty accurate in Manchester anyway.

Its just one city. They've got the whole rest of the state to go, as far as I can tell.

[sunonmars]

22. doubt it

DK only paid so far for partial recount, if this holds up, he will be reluctant to pay another 50K for a full recount.

[Marrah_G]

32. He paid for the 2 biggest counties

[sunonmars]

10. If this proves nothing happened

The bloody repugs will have a field day.

Choose your battles wisely.

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. They asked for a recount too.

This is a good thing even if nothing happened because it lets those who administer the black boxes know that we're watching.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. You don't get it, do you?

This wasn't about any candidate rigging the vote-it was about making sure Diebold was accurate. We can't wait until the GE and then find out there is hanky panky going on--we have to put them on notice now that we won't tolerate another stolen election.

[DURHAM D]

12. If this keeps up she will gain another delegate.

[SoxFan]

25. Unlikely

Not if Kucinich lacks the funds to conduct a complete recount. Under state law, if a recount is not completed, the initial results are the official results.

[jlake]

13. Hmm. Hillary has picked up 3X more votes than Obama....

I think Obama tried to steal it, but didn't take enough :tinfoilhat:

[bunnies]

15. Look at how FEW votes the republicans got!

wow. Im totally blown away! This is great! :bounce:

[Occam Bandage]

21. Huh. Looks like the machines were very accurate.

Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!

[adapa]

26. The machines we use are some of the most reliable- plus there's a paper trail

The machines aren't fancy but they do the job well

The local TV station is reporting the recount to cost $70,000.

The results will be tracked through the process, and Kucinich could end it at any time. He asked that it start with Manchester districts, which were counted by machines. He has said that he doesn't expect the recount to change his vote count much.

State Democratic Chairman Ray Buckley said that he also doesn't think the recount will show any dramatic change, but he believes it serves a valuable purpose.

" I think spot-checking really proves to the voters in New Hampshire that the votes are counted correctly," he said. "I think it's not only an important thing for people in New Hampshire, but across the country."

http://www.wmur.com/politics/15062536/detail.html

[pampango]

31. You're right. The "crying wolf" effect on future allegations of rigged vote counting

will make it tougher to make the case next time. And each time a vote is recounted and found to be effectively accurate, it becomes harder to make the case for a future ballot recount based on some conspiracy allegation (not counting very close elections that routinely get recounts regardless of the voting system).

The results of our primary in NH differed significantly from the preelection polls and the exit polls done that day. (Kind of reminds me of 2004.) If a recount does not prove that there was any conspiracy in vote counting, what happens next time when exit polls are not confirmed by election results?

[annie1]

28. Thank god.